And there, most economists are in agreement: The stimulus allowed the US to avoid an economic depression, where unemployment would have been higher and economic activity lower than where it is today.

The stimulus has “been a qualified success,” says Gus Faucher, director of macroeconomics for Moody's Economy.com, giving it “a solid B” grade. Its effect would have been larger if the stimulus had been larger, he notes.

The problem is that it's hard to quantify the success of such programs. How do you count something that didn't occur? “It’s not something you can observe,” Mr. Aliaga-Diaz says.

There's also an inherent lag between government spending and its economic effect, says Aliaga-Diaz. “From the moment it’s conceived to when it’s passed, there’s an implement lag, then an execution lag, and finally an effect lag in the economy. It takes time.”

That's a mushy number, based on reports by recipients of stimulus money and therefore difficult to calculate definitively.

And many Americans are looking for hard numbers.

“People aren’t going to feel good until they see job gains,” Mr. Faucher explains. “It’s the most tangible part of recovery.”

That upturn could still be a few months away because employers want to make sure an expansion is fully in place before they begin hiring.

Americans are generally sour on the stimulus package, but that's because they don't understand how much worse it could have been, economists say. For more of the Monitor's comprehensive economics coverage, follow us on Twitter: @CSMecon.